Zvikomborero Parafini
POPULAR hip hop artiste, Mukudzei Chitsama, popularly known as Holy Ten, has not decided on what action to take after the state withdrew rape charges before plea, citing insufficient evidence to sustain prosecution.
Holy Ten appeared before Harare regional magistrate Francis Mapfumo yesterday, where the State announced its decision to withdraw the charges.
The development follows representations made by the musician’s lawyers, who had written to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), challenging the strength of the evidence gathered against their client.
In a four-page letter dated October 27, 2026, Holy Ten’s lawyer, Admire Rubaya of Rubaya and Chatambudza Legal Practitioners, argued that the available evidence was insufficient to sustain a rape trial.
The letter, addressed to the Chief Director of the NPA in Harare, raised concerns over the medical evidence, alleged inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements and the circumstances surrounding the allegations.
Rubaya argued that a medical examination conducted on the complainant on July 21, a day after the alleged incident, had not established evidence of recent physical injuries.
The defence maintained that the medical findings did not corroborate the allegations against the musician.
The lawyers also questioned the complainant’s credibility, alleging that she had initially informed police officers that nothing had happened before subsequently making rape allegations.
According to the letter, the defence believed the alleged inconsistencies raised serious questions about the reliability of the State’s case.
Rubaya further challenged aspects of the complainant’s account, particularly her description of the circumstances under which the alleged offence occurred.
The defence also claimed that an independent witness could provide information relevant to the allegations and urged prosecutors to consider that evidence.
LETTER TO NPA
1. The above matter refers, in particular, to our above-named client, who has instructed us to engage with you regarding the pending criminal case against him, which was remanded to the 5th of November 2026. We confirm having received the State papers …, and in our respective view, there is no evidence which can sustain a proper criminal rape trial or even one for having sexual intercourse with a minor.
2. We have considered the alleged medical evidence, which was prepared by a Registered Nurse, Nyasha Muchemwa, after she had examined (the complainant).
The Complainant was allegedly raped before 10pm on the 20th of July 2026, and she was then examined at 12 noon on the 21s of July 2026.
What is both surprising and astounding is that when she was medically examined, there was no evidence of rape, the findings by the medical practitioner were contrary, this is so because per her own findings;
3.1 There were healed hymenal tears at 3 and 9 O’clock.
3.2 There were no bruises or abrasions noted on the Complainant’s genitalia as evidence of forced penetration, if there was any penetration at all.
4. The fact that the Complainant had a torn hymen with healed tears is a damning indictment of the State’s case vis-à-vis the allegations preferred against the Accused; beyond doubt, they confirm that she had previous …sexual experience before she raised these allegations against the Accused. Therefore, the medical evidence,
if considered, objectively exonerates the Accused person rather than support the allegations of rape.
5. Critically, there is no medical finding of fresh injury or recent trauma attributable to the alleged incident.
The medical evidence therefore does not corroborate rape; it contradicts any account of recent forcible penetration and supports the defence that the allegations are fabricated. Considered objectively, it exonerates the Accused rather than supports the charge.
6. What further complicates the State’s evidence is that the Complainant, in her statement at Clause 08, wrote that she “passed through the Police Station and told the Police Officers that nothing had happened.” She now states that she lied to the Police Officer when she alleged that nothing had happened.
However, the medical evidence, when read together with her initial statement, clearly exposes the Complainant’s machinations and confirms that the rape allegations were equally a fabrication: her first statement to the police that nothing had happened was true, and it is the later rape allegation that is false.
What is key is that once she admits to having lied to the police, how is the Court going to know when she would be telling the truth? That admission goes to the root of her credibility and leaves the State’s case without a reliable foundation.
7. The Complainant, according to one, Chido, alleged that she was coming from visiting her friend from South Africa, which is alleged to be false as well.
8. The Complaint is inadmissible for it was not made voluntarily, for it was concocted by the Complainant after Chido had taken the Complainant to the Police Station in a bid to cause her to explain away her movements for the day and her failure to return to their place of residence on time, just like her friend Natalie (surname withheld).
The complainant initially told the truth that nothing had happened to her but ultimately ended up fabricating allegations of rape against the Accused because that is what Chido wanted to hear; that is why they returned to the Police Station, where the Complainant had previously told the Police Officers that nothing had happened.
9. The Complainant’s story is clearly bogus. She alleges that the Accused locked the door to the room they had entered, and that the locking was done from inside the room. She then alleges that, after the locking, four other men entered the room and assisted the Accused to rape her. How then, if the door was locked from inside, did four other men enter? Either the door was not locked, or it was opened from inside, neither of which she explains.
That unexplained contradiction goes to the core of her narrative and is not a mere detail. It renders her account inherently improbable and confirms that the Complainant is not a truthful person
10. Our client further asserts that there is evidence that the Complainant might have been previously abused by some other unknown individuals consequent to being pimped as a 21-year-old lady, yet she was under the age of 18 years old.
11. What is clear is that these allegations of rape are false and fabricated.
There is an independent witness named Natasha, who is the sister of Natalie, who can clearly provide independent evidence regards the falsity of these allegations and what transpired, which resulted in these allegations being raised
against our client.
The Complainant has previously engaged Legal Practitioners, who communicated with us with a view to withdrawing the criminal complaint of rape
against our client.
It might be prudent for you to ascertain from the Complainant and/or her guardian if the legal practitioners in question were acting on their
instructions or were just misrepresenting to us.”
